[Analogy]

Reduce your JPG quality. You don’t have to set it to 100%, and it doesn’t have to look pixel perfect. Set your JPG quality just above the point where the picture starts looking bad.

[Analogy]

My concern with the 28-200 is the low max aperture. Even Canon’s consumer zooms nowadays are easily beating their top of the line primes from days back so I’m not really as concerned about optical quality. Pretty much any lens you buy in this day and age will look good for you. But not having an f/2.8 or wider max aperture is gonna hurt.

The 17-55 f/2.8 is good glass, though for the same price I was able to get a 24-70 f/2.8L, giving me a bit more tele reach while still having a reasonable wide end. Plus it’s L glass and a full-frame lens that will stay with me if I ever go to a full frame camera.

I’d say 24-70 and 70-200 and add a macro lens (though the 24-70 is able to achieve a 1:3 magnification ratio for macro, which isn’t bad at all). If the wide end on the 24-70 feels too cramped, you can add a 10-22 later.

[Analogy]

Autostitch

[Analogy]

I have an 18% grey lens cloth myself, but it doesn’t go on my keychain. Nice find!

[Analogy]

3. As to those trick filters I mentioned (Star filters, etc). She has those already for her old camera with a 52mm lense. Can they be used on the 77mm lenses with an adapter? Or would that be like cropping the image again?

Doing this will cause vignetting and will generally darken the picture. A larger filter can be stepped down onto a smaller lens, but not the other way around.

4. I am a little vague on the understanding between the f/4 and f/2.8. Sounds like it is the speed of the shutter? Schnee mentioned getting the bigger flash to assist with the f/4 lenses. Am I understanding that right? Another $100 to upgrade that flash, but the prices on the same lense at f/2.8 is about 3 times f/4. For what she is going to be doing, does she need the faster lense or just the better flash?

It’s not the shutter, it’s the aperture, which is an important factor in the lens’s light gathering ability. A larger aperture lets you go into darker areas without resorting to flash, and also allows you to isolate subjects using its smaller depth of field.

[Analogy]

The write speed of the card doesn’t matter all that much. I’ve done tests with faster and slower cards and the major limiting factor is the camera’s ability to shove data on to the card, not the write speed of the card. I think I tested my 30D at about 9 MB/sec.

The only real benefit of a faster card is that you get pictures off the card and onto your computer faster.

[Analogy]

millera9 told us he was hardcore.

[Analogy]

All EF mount lenses will still work on the newest Canon bodies, though the field of view will be narrower than she is used to because DSLRs have a smaller imaging area than film SLRs (see this page for more info).

My recommendation would actually be to get the 17-85mm kit lens, especially if she’s used to the look of the 35-80 on a film SLR as it will cover the range she is used to and give her a bit of extra range on top of that. The problem with the lenses in that kit you linked was that the widest you could go was 28mm, which isn’t all that great. They do have a lot more tele reach to them, but depending on the type of photography she does she may not need it. 85mm is as tight as most people need to go. If she needs more tele reach she will want faster glass than f/5.6 anyway unless she’s shooting everything is broad daylight.

The other consideration is that the 35-80mm lens was made decades ago. Lens design, even at the consumer level, has gotten so much better since then.

[Analogy]

I think a little more attention could have been paid to lighting. The shots in shadow don’t have enough of a “key,” and the ones in the sun have too many harsh shadows.

third row, third from the left would be my pick for mom. mainly for the composition and lighting.

The arrangement of the photos changes depending on how wide your browser window is, you’ll have to be a little more specific.

[Analogy]

That actually seems like a pretty good deal to me… When I got my 30D the body alone was $1k.
with two lenses (albeit consumer-level lenses) and that other stuff it sounds about right.

[Analogy]

I’m pretty sure that stitched panoramas are only allowed for special contests, sorry.

[Analogy]

Wow, drinks are $5 down there? Here in Minneapolis I usually get my rum&cokes for like $3.50… $4.50 if you count the tip.

[Analogy]

I would love to see the kind of night of drinking that costs as much as airfare and a hotel. =D

[Analogy]

As few as possible. I try to think of myself as a photographic sniper – one shot, one kill.

This. I shoot a lot of live band photos and can’t afford to miss unique moments so I always focus as much as possible on getting it right the first time.

[Analogy]

Analogy – Love those photos from Colorado Springs, especially the sky in the arm-shot.

The air is so thin and there’s so little pollution that the skies were some of the most amazing I have ever seen. Just deep, rich, saturated blue. I loved it.

[Author]

Posts